An earlier post, Dealing with Conflict in Relationships: The Art of Assertiveness, affirmed that interpersonal conflict is a normal and healthy aspect of relationships. It proposed conflict a means through which we maintain a dynamic balance between our own self-interest and the well-being of our partners. While it noted self-expression, active listening, and negotiation as three basic components of conflict resolution, it did not identify particular strategies that one might adopt in this process. The below table outlines eight such strategies. This list is not etched in stone, such that others may come up with a different number of strategies, and different strategies entirely. Much is simply a matter of personal preference as to how to cut up the pie, with the primary criterion of the “truth” of these concepts lying in their usefulness.
| STYLE | ADVANTAGES | DRAWBACKS |
|---|---|---|
| Avoidance -ignoring and refusing to deal with conflict | Strategic retreat, to prevent escalation of hostilities and to regain perspective | Conflicts, problems and stress accumulate, others lose respect for you and get their way by default |
| Accommodation- giving in, submitting, capitulating | Admitting when wrong, conceding when defeated, when your opponent has all the leverage | Getting less of what you want, being perceived as weak, getting taken advantage of, getting taken for granted |
| Competition - trying to win the best deal that you can get | Getting the best deal you can get, demonstrating your sense of self-worth | Putting self-interest ahead of the relationship, with the risk of weakening it |
| Confrontation- standing your ground, claiming to be in the right, declaring the other side wrong | Standing up for your principles and values, clarifying differences in perspectives | Alienating others; appearing self-righteous and dogmatic; threatening the relationship; blaming, judging others as inferior, wrong, immoral, etc. |
| Coercion- being “heavy-handed” with applying leverage, using threats and perhaps involving blackmailing or extortion | Getting your way, at least on the particular issue at hand | Expectable deterioration of the relationship, trust and good faith |
| Provocation- escalation of tensions by inflaming the anger of the other | Temporary relief of tension by discharging anger, gaining leverage by getting the other to lose control and act impulsively | Usually an escalation of tension, with greater chance of violence; deterioration of trust and respect, major damage to the relationship |
| Compromise - negotiating for 50 - 50 solutions, meeting int the middle | Give and take, balance of self-interest and care for the other, demonstrating commitment to the relationship by showing willingness to make sacrifices | Possible compromising of ideals, principles and integrity; possibly not getting the best deal available |
| Collaboration - cooperating, working together to get more of what you both want, despite differences | Maximizing gains for both sides, attaininng "win-win" solutions (e.g., a 70-70 or 80-70 solution, rather than just a 50-50 one), strengthening the relationship | Same as compromise, plus lending credibility to a position antithetical to your values, ethics, and principles |
Note that the table lists both advantages and drawbacks for each of the eight interpersonal conflict strategies. That does not mean that they are equally helpful, as certain ones, such as compromise and collaboration, are typically more productive, particularly in the context of an ongoing relationship. The effectiveness of a particular conflict strategy often depends upon the particular situation in which it is used: sometimes you need a saw, and other times you need a hammer.
Thanks for sharing the previous article.. i would have to raise a few objections! What you describe here is like a manual on how to deal with conflict in our relationship.. this sounds so intellectual, so verbal to me.. relationship is the most important thing in the world, relationship is alive, relationship takes place every single moment. How could possibly a manual with strategies could treat such an lively thing as relationship..
I think it’s the most crucial thing to be able to live NOW, not according to manuals, methods and techniques.. To live Now sets you free from the past, so from fears, psychological pain, contradictory desires etc.. the past can’t treat what happens now because the past is dead, things are completely different now. Why don’t we live at all? Why we lead a life based on guidance given by authorities?
Seems so crazy to me..
Hopefully i am not getting personal here, i only wanted to communicate a quite different point of view
Thanks for sharing your perspective. I agree with much of what you say, such that I’m not sure that the apparent differences are real conflicts, as much as misunderstandings. Perhaps I did not state my meaning and intentions clearly. My intention was not to offer a manual for how to deal with conflict – the article was meant to be descriptive rather than prescriptive. If this helps a people pleaser who usually avoids conflict or accommodates to others understand why others take him/her for granted or take advantage of him/her, then I’ve met my goal. If one who usually uses competition, coercion, confrontation, and provocation recognizes how such approaches tend to alienate the one’s family and friends over time, then I’ve met my goal.
The real magic in conflict occurs when we really listen to one another’s perspectives. This opens the door to humility, compassion, gratitude, and emotional intimacy. Here, the “by-products” often outweigh the intended goal of resolving the conflict. (This I address in the latter part of my page, Muddling Down a Middle Path.)
I also value living in the Now, something which I must continually work on. I also value learning from reflection, expressed in George Santayana’s famous quote, “Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.” Balancing the two is a real challenge: can we live fully in the moment while learning from the insights of others, or are we limited to the choice of trial and error living in the moment versus living according to abstract principles dictated by authorities? (Calvin and Hobbes illustrates this paradox rather eloquently in a comic strip from November 21, 1990, in my view.)
Thanks for sharing your feedback – hopefully, it has helped me to clarify my views. I do not intend to present an authoritarian perspective for others to adopt without questioning- if I did, I doubt that I would adopt the title of Rogue Psychologist. I also hope that your comment and my response will encourage other readers to share their reactions to my posts and pages, to develop a stimulating and relevant dialogue.
Yes, now it’s much more clear.. thanks for describing in detail 🙂 One additional question,i would like to put.. how exactly do we learn from the past.. obviously i don’t refer to the physical world.. obviously it’s quite useful to learn who to deal with cold, to learn how to find the way to my home etc. But what it means to learn psychologically? is it a process of accumulating knowledge, or something quite different?.. let’s say you insult me.. is it actual learning to register this experience and always be in a defensive mood against you when i meet you because of this past insult? Or actual learning has to do with the potential to perceive “what is” right now? if you wish we can delve together